When he says grew up he forgot to mention he was old back then.
Sox and Yanks
- Thread starter BruceC
- Start date
'Ol Fezziwig
Repressed Dissident
Not really; pitchers tend to be the best athletes in many cases, especially in younger leagues; the issue is one of lack of in-depth pitching knowledge: location, setting up batters, need to throw 1st pitch strikes, near strikes, purpose pitches, brushbacks (not hitting batters, but making them uncomfortable in the box) and a lack of good control/ability to throw off-speed and/or breaking pitches.
The fault lies in many cases with the organisations, not just the athletes. Many years ago (the Earl Weaver years, go figure...), the Baltimore Orioles had the premiere organisation viz fundamental and advanced baseball skills. Little things like throwing the ball to the infield on one bounce to prevent handcuffing the infielders on a short hop near the bag OR teaching infielders to catch cutoffs across the front of their bodies to reduce the time it takes to throw the ball to the bases, e.g. catching the ball already IN throwing position.
Nowadays, it seems all the teams want is offense, offense, offense...
'Ol Fezziwig
Repressed Dissident
So he remembers the Cincinnati Redstockings, then...alright, I get it now...When he says grew up he forgot to mention he was old back then.
Right, which is what I meant by a diluted pitching pool not necessarily that they are weaker athletes.
'Ol Fezziwig
Repressed Dissident
Think Jeter gets brushed back tonight?
Last edited:
'Ol Fezziwig
Repressed Dissident
What amazes me the most about this day and age is the number of pitchers who are throwing 90+ mph, it's almost to the point where they seem to need to be able to hit 95+ to guarantee any volume of work on a regular basis. That, and the mind blowing movement these guys get. Back in the day, a guy had a curve, slider and a (straight) fastball....maybe a changeup if they worked at it. Nowadays, a kid needs like two pitches (2 and 4 seam fastballs) so long as one of them is able to tail back over the plate when it's thrown justoff the corners.
What I could have done with that sort of movement...
Despite leaning out over the plate, no. ARod was hit and the crowd went wild. Wasn't an All Star game but there you go. Hansen didn't try to hit him. It was 7-3, men on 2nd & 3rd, and he was all over the place. Pitch got away from him. 10-3 final. Tomorrow they go for the sweep and a tie for 2nd place in the division.
Hubbs5
Member
What I could have done with that sort of movement...[/quote]
Wow you really are getting old when a movement gets that exciting. :devious:
Wow you really are getting old when a movement gets that exciting. :devious:
soggycrow
Polish Submariner
Major League pitchers are all of the really really good baseball players who couldn't hit high level pitching.
'Ol Fezziwig
Repressed Dissident
...like George Herman Ruth?
He could hit... against the best white pitchers.
soggycrow
Polish Submariner
I think that his management was a bit asleep. He didn't spend that much time at Baltimore, then a minor league team. The one thing they knew about him was that he was an excellent pitcher. People who watched him play in his late teens at the school for orphans claimed that he was the best all around ballplayer they had ever seen. Of course he was a twenty game winner at Boston. He had been acquired as a pitcher. It took a little while for people to realize that he could hit. But once that happened he became an every day ball player. If he had not been able to hit, he probably would have had a very good career as a pitcher.
Mark Nixon
Member
I'd say "probably would have had a very good career as a pitcher" is a safe bet. The 4 years of 1915-1918 when he was pitching full time he was 78-40 (so for 4 years he averaged 19-10 or 20-10 however you want to call it). Then he sorta pitched in 1919 (9-5) and then played another 16 years. It's a great "what-if" question. I am guessing some statistical wizard out there has speculated this out into what sort of career pitching record Ruth might have had. Anybody have that data?
Teehee, I couldn't resist this one...
:nuts:
Respectfully?
Arrogance..?
Yes, apparently you got all the wit, imagination and respect. But, we do have last years' WS rings. I'll take the rings.
How's that drug regimen workin' for ya?
:nuts:
wrongway149
Forum Guru
Plus, ya gotta remember that at the time, great pitching wasn't as comparatively rare as today. (Could be in part because of different rules, though) A guy who could hit 50 taters, on the other hand, was something nobody had ever seen before.
So for Ruth, It seems although his pitching would have to be considered very good by any measure, as a hitter was so far ahead of everyone else that I wonder how many dingers he would've smacked if he had played every day during those early years.
Last edited:
MLaPanzer
Senior Member
Wonder what he could have done if he had put down the booze and picked up roids?
Not so fast young padawan! Red Sox 9-2 final game #3.
Yep and the Rays lost. The race is on.
bryanspellman
Member
Congrats Sox fan for taking 1 of 3 and avoiding the sweep. What is up with Manny?
As for the Babe, there are several interesting books on the subject (my favorite is Creamer's). If he would have continued pitching today's aces would be winning Babe's and not Cy's. Also he did pitch some more over the years. He pitched for the Yankees a game or two in the 30's and was said to still dominate!
As for the Babe, there are several interesting books on the subject (my favorite is Creamer's). If he would have continued pitching today's aces would be winning Babe's and not Cy's. Also he did pitch some more over the years. He pitched for the Yankees a game or two in the 30's and was said to still dominate!
Darrell Andersen
Senior Member
"What is up with Manny?"
Still nuts.
Still nuts.